About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
as a u.s. senator from massachusetts. mr. president, i am proud to join my colleagues today in support of the violence against women act of 2013. i do so not just as a senator but as a mother of two daughters. this critical legislation has been held up for far too long, and it's past time for reauthorization. we have a serious responsibility to ensure that women and families are protected. the rates of violence and abuse in our country are astounding and totally unacceptable. according to a 2010c.d.c. study, domestic violence affects more than 12 million people each year. across the united states, 15 1/2 million children lives in homes in which domestic violence has occurred. and in my home state of north carolina alone, 73 women and children are killed on average every year because of domestic violence. let me say that number one more time. 73 women and children are killed every year due to domestic violence. these are alarming statistics, and we must act now to address them. since 1994, vawa programs, and in particular the stop program, that provides grants for services, training, of
certainly regards israel as a true and natural u.s. ally." in another quote, he said, "i know hagel personally. i think he believes in the relationship and the natural partnership between israel and the united states." here is an israeli patriot who has spent a great deal of time devoted to the relationship with the united states of israel who understand, in his words, and concludes that chuck hagel regards israel as a true and natural u.s. ally and will act accordingly. he is a dedicated patriot. he is an individual who has served this country in so many different ways and i support his nomination, urge my colleagues to do the same. i think, too, it's important to state that this nomination, as we've done with every secretary of defense for decades, deserves an up-or-down vote on the floor of the united states senate. people may choose to cast a vote against him for many reasons. that's the prerogative of a senator. but i strongly believe that if we want to stay true to the traditions of this body and to the presumption that the president should be at least allowed to have his nomi
's with 93% of employers not using the program. outdated examples of e-verify errors. a u.s. citizen in tennessee actually receive an error notice from her employer. she went to the social security administration office to fix it. she thinks she fixes it at social security, but e-verify generates another error and she gets fired. another example, a u.s. citizen experienced an error because an employer made a simple mistake when they were typing the employee's social security number into the system. again, that worker went to a social security office, couldn't resolve the error there, e-verify generated a final nonconfirmation and the worker got fired. the most disturbing piece of all this is that for workers who lose their jobs because of an e-verify error, there's no formal process in place for them to get the jobs back and that's a problem for thousands of workers who experience these errors because you can imagine, these problems are only going to grow exponentially if we mandate the program. given these concerns, we have recommendations for how to move forward. first, congress ne
've heard recently that among developed nations the u.s. has fallen to the bottom as far as longevity is concerned. yet we're paying a lot more than other people. wouldn't it save substantial medicare costs if we veered away from the pill for every ill, that mindset that we've kind of adopted in this country and embrace, look at other measures such as prevention, alternatives and educating people on things like genetically-modified foods and the long-term dangers they can present? >> i don't know who wants to take this. this is, i mean, questions often come up about improving coverage of prevention sort of over the course of a lifetime and in medicare. um, and there's been a lot of in that, and there have been a lot of improvements lately. one of the sort of unfortunate realities of living in this town and working with the congressional budge office as a score -- budget office as a scorekeeper is sometimes those initiatives, people believe they will save money, the cbo scores an increase in spending depending on the preventive service because they don't have a lifetime view, or they m
's nominee to be u.s. representative to the united nations. now some presidents include that position in their cabinet. some do not. but astpraoeud that singular insurance -- aside from that sing latin incident which i pointous was the democrats saying they're going to filibuster a nominee by the president and deny him a seat, so far as i've been able to tell there's not been ever an instant in the history of the senate where republicans have used a filibuster to deny a cabinet member an up-or-down vote when nominated by a president. that only leaves appellate judge nominations, circuit judge nominees. up until 2003, so far as i've been able to find, the rule of the senate was that the president's nominees to be on the federal courts of appeal always received an up-or-down vote. they were decided by a vote of 51. then our friends on the democratic side when president bush became president decided they didn't like that, and they changed the practice. they began to filibuster president bush's judges for up or down -- to deny them their seats. i had just arrived in the senate in 2003, mr
. their record -- lousy, persistent, double-digit unemployment and negative economic growth. the u.s. unemployment rate of 7.9% which is actually even higher than my home state is for sure too high, but it is far better than the rate of 26% unemployment in spain and greece, the record of 16% unemployment in portugal. our 2.3% growth rate may seem inadequate and it is, but as we recover from the deepest recession we've seen since the great depression, it is much better than the negative growth rates in the countries that took the austerity path. the results are clear -- the evidence is in from the austerity experiments. the countries that cut the deepest have hurt the most. if we want to continue growing our economy and creating jobs, we need to resist the european path that is championed by republican austerity advocates. we need to maintain the balanced approach that has brought the u.s. economy up out of recession. admittedly not fast enough, but look at what the alternative has been. leader reid's bill would replace the indiscriminate cuts of the so-called sequester with targeted
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6